"We will have more information about SONAR X1c in late July"

Well, it's late July so I guess we'll know the content of X1c before the week is out!
I know, I know, it'll be done when it's done, and I'm a strong believer in having it right late rather than wrong on time.
But I'm still getting excited!

I have been debating as to whether or not I should bring this up for fear of offending anyone, but here I go. My concerns at this point is the only so called improvements in X1c that have been touted was improvements on features that I for one NEVER use. I don't write or produce loop based or techno tracks but every once in a blue moon. How is that for an old saying. I use Sonar to basically write and mock up songs and soundtracks. While I do use the occasional special FX sound once and a while, my modus operandi tends to be writing music on the traditional level. Drums, Bass, Guitar, Keyboard player, Brass sections, Orchestra. etc. While playing around with the step sequencer is fun, it is not my main source of income. I am not so old school that I would say I will never use these features. I just don't use them enough to be too excited about their improvement. My clients, other than the rap guys that I work with from time to time, will not be thrilled about the step sequencer being improved. Their reaction will be," Get that nu age crap out of there!" BTW, I like nuage. All I'm saying is it seems to be that Cake is trying to smooth over some of the ruffled feathers concerning the fiasco release of X1. I wish they would take into consideration there are still those of us out here that use their products for more traditional good, solid songwriting. Give us something to be excited about as well. I hope I haven't offended anyone with this post. I just am concerned that those of us who use this product for traditional recording are being overlooked for the young guys coming up that don't even know what a scale is. They just turn on the step sequencer and mess around for a while and the machine makes a neat sound.

I don't know what good it does to say you "hope" you're not offending anyone and then come out with a sweeping generalisation that paints people who work differently to yourself as incompetents. "Don't know what a scale is" indeed.

What more do the 'traditional recording' people require? What can't you do with Sonar currently?

Sometimes, yeah. depends on the job.

Learn to read, Mike. The items in quotes are directly from his post. Or you know, go away and troll somebody else, I'm not interested.

John T


Sometimes, yeah. depends on the job.

Learn to read, Mike. The items in quotes are directly from his post. Or you know, go away and troll somebody else, I'm not interested.

OK I learned to read.

mattox82


What more do the 'traditional recording' people require? What can't you do with Sonar currently?

Varispeed would be nice.  It has been used for pretty much as long as tape has and it'd be nice to have it in Sonar.  It'd save me frequent trips to Reaper.

My comments were never intended to be insults hurled anyones way. I am simply saying there are those of us that are devoted Cake users that don't see much to be excited about when it comes to features that we SOME of us never use. If you were insulted I am deeply sorry. There is an attitude these days that anyone that doesn't like what the next person is into is their enemy. I was raised playing classical music, therefore my expertise is very strong in reading and writing traditional music styles. I was born and spent my early years in Macon, Ga. Home of Otis Redding, Little Richard. And best known, the southern rock industry. Allman Brothers, Marshall Tucker, Wet Willie, Charlie Daniels, etc. I worked with some of these guys. Both production and performing. Yet, I am not a southern rock FANBOY! All I am saying is for my use, I do not write cool sounds. I write and read music. There are some of us here who need some tools in X1 as well. Noy just a synth or step sequencer. These are legit tools for someone who uses them. I, for one, don't. When I compose it is playing the guitar part, playing the bass part, and if I have to compose the drums as well, I can't use just a loop. There are strategic places where cymbal crashes and fills occur that I can't use out of the box patterns. I write those as well. Most of my time is spent in staff view. I am not saying that makes my way of working more legit that yours. I am simply saying that those of us that are using X1 on a professional commercial level would like to see features that benefit us as well as you. I am sorry if what I said was misconstrued. The main thing I could use would be an integrated fully featured sampler along the lines of Kontakt or the old VSampler. Cake seems to be leaning more towards something more appropriate for someone who wants to throw in a loop pull up a preset in Rapture, fire up the step sequencer and VIOLA! that sounds cool. IT DOES SOUND COOL! And I am so glad that anyone can has access to these tools to do that. BUT, my studio generates money from pop, rock, country and some soundtrack work. Noone is saying the way you work is wrong. Or my way is better. You must understand I have a background in music that strecthes from Beethoven to Zeppelin. That doesn't make me better or smarter than anyone. I am used to working in traditional formats and the new tools don't provide me what I need. If you read any of my posts you will see, I am a rabid Cake user! I support any and all music. I wish you well in your endeavors. ROCK ON!.

I wish you well in your endeavors.

 
And I wish you well in yours too... And I hope you get the tools you need! In some cases more is actually more.
 
Regards

I am not complaining that Sonar is not good enough as it is. If it wasn't working for me I would have stuck with Cubase or Logic or Samplitude all of which I use from time to time. It goes without saying when I am in Nashville or Orlando, I am usually on Pro Tools. Sonar works best for me! I am thankful that a company provides me with more tools than I use in their product. The core of my post was to maybe inspire someone at Cake to improve on some of the more conventional features, or re-think some of their older ones that got dis-carded. I know that there are third party plugs out there for sale that do the things I need. I own most of them. Maybe give us back DXi support for those of us who love our older DX plugs and want to use them in 64. That would keep me from jumping from 32 to 64 for a particular fave I use all the time. Small things like that. It just is frustrating sometimes that us old workhorses don't really see the improvements or features offered to us that the younger guys coming up are getting in the way of synths and step sequencers. You want us to move to 64 bit. Fine, Give me a better qaulity Boost 11 64. How about a high quality sonic maximizer. My clients love that thing. Really give us high quality 64 bit tools, not just an overall "throw all this stuff in there and they'll love it" type list of things. I have used and loved Cake products since Pro Audio 9. They are so close to having the ultimate DAW. With very little effort in R&D they would be the best there is. It pains me to see them fall a little short on X1 the way they did. I STILL LOVE THEIR PRODUCTS! And I will always support them in everything they do. As well as the guys in this forum. You all are a godsend!

John T


(EDIT: cross post, ironically enough. This was addressed to rbowser's post)

I've raised this point before, but I'm still kind of puzzled by it, and haven't really had an answer from anybody.

If the thing really is so dreadful, and in some opinions getting worse, isn't it kind of crazy to carry on using it and "hoping" it gets better? Why would anyone do that?

If I held such a view, me, I'd be long gone.

Hi, John - Speaking just for myself (as always) - I'm not using X1 and praying it'll get better.  I'm using 8.5, but X1 is on my machine, and I poke at it now and then in order to see if I can help someone with a question - and also because I have kind of a morbid fascination with it, something like a kid poking a slug to see how it'll react. - In other words, I'm here on this X1 Forum since I own the program, - but like some others here who are also active, I'm not using the program--I have too much work to get done.

Randy B.

It doesn't matter, no.

What I don't like is the assumption that people who make electronic stuff and use step sequencer type tools are generally the technically unsophisticated people. I don't think that holds water at all.

Also, thinking that making such music is simply a matter of whacking up some loops and presets is equally wrong. That's just the electronic equivalent of getting the guitars out and playing Alright Now; it might be fun to do, but nobody's going to be interested in hearing it.

rbowser


Hmmm, interesting conversation/argument.  I think the sorts of things some of Sonar users would like to see improved/fixed are things that would effect users of all sorts - those who compose music, and those who assemble loops.

But it seems to me that the core issues are ones that are now just part of Cakewalk's new theory about how they want the program to work, with the pages of arcane keybindings, the nested menus to learn, the screensets gimmick which is slower and clumsier than the pre-screenset multi-screens available in Sonar 8.5 and earlier - etc.

The most we can really hope for is for the long list of glitches to be fixed/improved, not for the clumsy interface to be re-done so it's fast and smooth to work with as earlier versions were. 

If there's Any improvement in X1c, then users of all kinds can only benefit.

Randy B.

Hi Randy...

Yeah... I don't expect these issues to be changed until the next 'total' re-write... But they can be ammended in many ways to accomplish the same ends... I believe they will do this as it's in their' best interests as a company as well as for it's users. I feel that many of these issues are the way they are due to their' own need/pressure as a company... the new gui may become a blessing in multi-screen operations which are becoming more common every day... But they didn't have the time/resources to get all the functionality back into the program... as well as needing to hear/see where the new paradigm is lacking...

So now the race is on to keep users happy... Some already are as they are satisfied with the changes which are of their liking and either don't experience or don't mind the problems and issues...

So, feeling I know Cakewalk (hopefully it's not yet Roland in total control) I'm sure they're well on their way to adressing the many issues.... We just have to live long enuf... They are fully aware of the many issues being tossed about and I'm sure they want a way to please all... eventually...

Keni

Sorry - duplicate post.  IE9 and this forum will STILL not play nicely!

yorolpal


In the end, and for better or worse, (hopefully better:-) it's the musical final product that matters.  But I don't think that one can rationally argue that it takes the same level of dedicated study, practise and discipline to judge and assemble pre-made loops in a collage like manner to becoming a proficient musician or musical clinician.  This does not make the loop assemblers "unsophisticated" in any way.  Nor does it have any bearing on the validity or quality of the musical product they produce.  It is simply an accurate way to differentiate between two distinct groups striving for similar ends. 

Hmm. Well, that's not what I'm arguing. I'm arguing that the assumptions non-electronic musicians make about the nature of what electronic musicians are actually doing tend to be incorrect.

Sure, judging and assembling pre-made loops in a collage-like manner is relatively easy, coming of course with attendant constraints on what can be achieved that way. This is one of the reasons why it's fairly rare to hear a successful record made using solely such simplistic methodology.